Profile and scientific production of Brazilian National Council of
Technological and Scientific Development researchers in Pediatrics
Perfil e produção científica dos pesquisadores do Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico na área de PediatriaPerfil y producción científica de los investigadores del Consejo Nacional de Desarrollo Científico y Tecnológico en el área de Pediatría
Maria Christina L. Oliveira1, Daniella Reis B. Martelli2, Sergio Veloso Pinheiro3, Debora Marques Miranda4, Isabel Gomes Quirino5,
Barbara Gusmão L. Leite2, Enrico Antonio Colosimo6, Ana Cristina S. e Silva7, Hercílio Martelli-Júnior8, Eduardo Araujo Oliveira9
Instituição: Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais (UFMG), Belo Horizonte, MG, Brasil
1Doutora em Gastroenterologia pela UFMG; Professora-Associada do Departamento de Pediatria da UFMG,Belo Horizonte, MG, Brasil 2Mestre em Ciências da Saúde pelo Programa de Pós-Graduação em Ciências da Saúde da Universidade Estadual de Montes Claros (Unimontes), Montes Claros, MG, Brasil
3Doutor em Ciências Biológicas pelo Instituto de Ciências Biológicas da UFMG; Professor-Adjunto do Departamento de Pediatria da UFMG, Belo Horizonte, MG, Brasil
4Doutora em Farmacologia Bioquímica e Molecular pela UFMG; Professora Adjunto do Departamento de Pediatria da UFMG, Belo Horizonte, MG, Brasil 5Doutora em Ciências da Saúde pela UFMG, Belo Horizonte, MG, Brasil 6Doutor em Estatística pela University of Wisconsin; Professor-Titular do Departamento de Estatística da UFMG, Belo Horizonte, MG, Brasil 7Doutora em Ciências da Saúde pela UFMG; Professora-Titular do Departamento de Pediatria da UFMG,Belo Horizonte, MG, Brasil 8Doutor em Ciências da Saúde pelo Programa de Pós-Graduação em Ciências da Saúde da Unimontes; Professor-Titular do Programa de Pós-Graduação em Ciências da Saúde da Unimontes, Montes Claros, MG, Brasil 9Doutor em Ciências da Saúde pela UFMG; Professor-Titular do Departamento de Pediatria da UFMG, Belo Horizonte, MG, Brasil
ABSTRACT
Objective: To evaluate the profile and the scientific production of researchers in Pediatrics with scholarship from the National Counsel of Technological and Scientific Development.
Methods: The Lattes curricula of 34 researchers in Pe-diatrics with active scholarships, from 2006 to 2008 were included in the analysis. The variables of interest were: gender, affiliation, time since PHD, tutoring of undergradu-ate students, mentorship of masters and doctors, scientific production and the papers’ impact.
Results: In a total of 411 researchers in Medicine, 34 (8%) belonged to Pediatrics. Males (77%) and scholars in the category 2 of productivity (62%) prevailed. Three states of Brazil were responsible for approximately 90% of the researchers: São Paulo (53%), Minas Gerais (21%), and Rio Grande do Sul (15%). During their academic career, the Pediatrics researchers have
pub-lished 3,122 articles with a median of 89 articles per researcher (interquartile range – IQ=51–119). Of the total, 40 and 59% articles were indexed in the Web of Science and Scopus databases, respectively. The Pediatrics researchers have published papers in 599 journals with a median impact factor of 2.35 (IQ=1.37–3.73) for the 323 indexed journals.
Conclusions: The Pediatrics researchers have a relevant sci-entific output from the quantity point of the view, but there is a need to improve quality.
Key-words: scientific publication indicators; Pediatrics; Medicine; education, Medical, Graduate; Health Sciences.
RESUMO
Objetivo: Avaliar o perfil e a produção científi-ca de pesquisadores de Pediatria, científi-cadastrados como
Endereço para correspondência: Eduardo Araujo Oliveira
Rua Engenheiro Amaro Lanari, 389 CEP 30310-580 – Belo Horizonte/MG E-mail: eduolive812@gmail.com
Fonte financiadora: Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de Minas Gerais (Fapemig) – PPM-00345-11 e 00286-11
Conflito de interesse: nada a declarar
bolsistas de produtividade científica do Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico.
Métodos: O currículo Lattes de 34 pesquisadores em Pediatria, com bolsas ativas no triênio 2006 a 2008, foram incluídos na análise. As variáveis de interesse foram: sexo, instituição, tempo de doutoramento, orientação de alunos de graduação, mestres e doutores, artigos publicados e impacto da publicação.
Resultados: De um total de 411 pesquisadores em Medicina, 34 (8%) foram identificados como da área de Pediatria. Houve uma predominância do gênero masculino (77%) e de bolsistas na categoria 2 (62%). Três estados foram responsáveis por aproximadamente 90% dos pesquisadores: São Paulo (53%), Minas Gerais (21%) e Rio Grande do Sul (15%). No total da carreira acadêmica, os pesquisadores em Pediatria publicaram 3.122 artigos, sendo a mediana de 89 artigos por pesquisador (intervalo interquartil – IQ=51–119). Desse total, 40 e 58,5% foram artigos indexados nas bases de dados Web of Science e Scopus, respectivamente. Os pesquisadores em Pediatria publicaram em 599 periódicos, com mediana de fator de impacto de 2,35 (IQ=1,37–3,73) para os 323 periódicos indexados.
Conclusões: Na presente investigação, observou-se que os pesquisadores na área de Pediatria apresentam uma produção científica relevante do ponto de vista quantitativo, mas há necessidade de aprimoramento qualitativo das publicações.
Palavras-chave: indicadores de produção científica; Pe-diatria; Medicina; educação de Pós-Graduação em Medicina; Ciências da Saúde.
RESUMEN
Objetivo: Evaluar el perfil y la producción científica de los investigadores en Pediatría catastrados como becarios de productividad científica del Consejo Nacional de Desarrollo Científico y Tecnológico.
Métodos: Se incluyó en el análisis el currículo Lattes de 34 investigadores en Pediatría con becas activas en el trienio 2006 a 2008. Las variables de interés fueron: sexo, institución, tiempo de doctoramiento, orientación de alumnos de la carrera, maestros y doctores, artículos publicados e impacto de la publicación.
Resultados: De un total de 411 investigadores en Medicina, 34 (8%) fueron identificados como del área de Pediatría. Hubo una predominancia del género masculino (77%) y de becarios en la categoría 2 (62%). Tres provincias fueron responsables por un 90% de los investigadores: São Paulo (53%), Minas Gerais (21%) y Rio Grande do Sul (15%). En el total de la carrera académica, los investigadores en Pediatría publicaron 3.122
artículos, siendo la mediana de 89 artículos por investigador (intervalo intercuartil – IQ=51–119). De ese total, 40 y 58,5% fueron artículos indexados en las bases de datos Web of Science y Scopus, respectivamente. Los investigadores en Pediatría publi-caron en 599 periódicos, con mediana de factor de impacto de 2,35 (IQ=1,37–3,73) para los 323 periódicos indexados.
Conclusiones: En la presente investigación, se observó que los investigadores en el área de Pediatría presentan una produc-ción científica relevante desde la mirada cuantitativa, pero hay necesidad de perfeccionamiento cualitativo de las publicaciones.
Palabras clave: indicadores de producción científica; Pediatría; Medicina; educación de Postgrado en Medicina; Ciencias de la Salud.
Introduction
Brazil is one of the few middle-income countries that have a consistent state program for funding the production of scientiic knowledge, despite the limited budget allocated to research in re-lation to gross domestic product(1-3). On the other hand, in recent
years there has been a signiicant increase in scientiic production and training of researchers(4). Scientiic publications of Brazilian
researches in indexed journals jumped from 14,237, in 2003, to 30,415, in 2008, according to data from Thomson Reuters(5).
Several factors have contributed to the current positive cycle of Brazilian scientiic production, as the increase in the federal bud-get for science and technology, which rose, in 2008, from 1.26 to 1.43% of Brazil’s gross domestic product(6). Furthermore, the
increase in scientiic research is associated with various stimulat-ing mechanisms established by various development agencies in the country(7,8).
In this context, stands out a particular form of funding cre-ated by the National Council for Scientiic and Technological Development (Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Cientíico e Tecnológico - CNPq) in the 1970s, called scientiic productivity fellowship (PQ). This fellowship was designed as a form of support to researchers with outstanding scientiic output(9). Several studies
have examined the academic production of researchers supported by CNPq, in different areas of knowledge(9-13). A recent study
assessed the proile of CNPq researchers in Medicine, in which several areas of specialty were compared(12,14). However, systematic
Method
This was a cross-sectional study, consisting initially of a database with 411 researches registered at CNPq as PQ fel-lows, according to a list provided by this federal agency for research funding in February 2009(14). It was considered as area
of expertise the one speciically appointed by the researcher in his Lattes. When this information was omitted, the scientiic production of the researcher in the last 5 years was analyzed and the area with a predominance of published and/or advised topics was adopted. In speciic cases of well-deined subareas, for instance, Pediatric Nephrology, the researcher was included in the area of Pediatrics, and the subarea was considered in a separate variable (in this case, Nephrology). Thus, following this methodology, the Lattes curricula of 34 researchers in Pediatrics with active fellowships in the triennium 2006–2008 were included in the analysis.
After the identiication of the fellow researchers, the Lattes curricula, publicly available on the Lattes platform (CNPq), were systematically consulted. From the resumes, a database was cre-ated, with information related to the distribution of PQ research-ers by category (1A, 1B, 1C, 1D, and category 2)(15), geographical
and institutional distribution, completion time of doctoral degree, scientiic production (scientiic articles), and training in human resources (undergraduate, master’s, and doctoral supervisions). To investigate scientiic production, all publications and supervisions during the researcher’s career were considered. Supervisions and publications in the last 5 years were also analyzed, considering the period of 2004-2008.
The following variables were analyzed: sex, researcher’s insti-tution, Doctorate’s completion time, doctoral instiinsti-tution, fel-lowship category, supervisions of undergraduate research fellows (bolsistas de iniciação cientíica – BIC), master’s and PhD students, and publications in journals. Regarding supervisions and publi-cations, the absolute values of the entire scientiic career and the values for the period 2004–2008 were evaluated. Moreover, the supervisions and publications adjusted according to doctorate’s completion time were computed. The Thomson Reuters Web of Science (Institute for Scientiic Information – http://apps. JCRknowledge.com/) – and Scopus (http://www.scopus.com/ home.url) databases were also investigated. Both were searched through electronic websites from Capes (Coordination for the Improvement of Higher Education Personnel – http://novo. periodicos.capes.gov.br/). In these databases, it was searched for scientiic articles published by researchers listed in CNPq’s database. The scientiic name of the researcher used in this in-vestigation was that provided in Lattes, but there was an intense
search for possible variations of researchers’ names. Performance indicators were also included in the analysis, such as the number of citations, h-index, and m-index(16-20).
The development of the database and statistical analyses were performed with the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS), version 18.0, for Windows. For statistical analysis, in relation to researcher categories, category 1 researchers (levels 1A, 1B, 1C and 1D) were grouped, since there was only one scholar acting in the ield of Pediatrics in categories 1A and 1B. Thus, all comparisons between researcher categories were between levels 1 and 2. Continuous data were reported using median and interquartile range (IQ). The nonparametric Mann-Whitney test was used for comparison between researcher categories. Nominal or dichotomous variables were compared using the chi-square test. The level of signiicance was set at 5%.
Results
Among the total of 411 researchers in Medicine, 34 (8.0%) were identiied as working in the area of Pediatrics. The distri-bution of the 34 researchers by gender and fellowship category is summarized in Table 1. There was a predominance of male patients (76.5%) and grants in category 2 (61.8%). There was no signiicant difference in the distribution of categories between genders (p=0.48). Three Brazilian states were responsible for ap-proximately 90% of researchers: São Paulo (n=18; 53.0%), Minas Gerais (n=7; 21.0%) and Rio Grande do Sul (n=5; 15.0%). In relation to home institution, researchers were spread over nine dif-ferent institutions in the country. However, four institutions were responsible for approximately 82% of researchers: Universidade de São Paulo (USP) (n=12; 35.0%), Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais (UFMG) (n=7; 21,0%), Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP) (n=5; 15.0%), and Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio Grande do Sul (PUC-RS) (n=4; 12.0%). Six researchers (17.6%) reported acting in the area of Pneumology
Table 1 - Distribution of research fellows in Pediatrics according
to gender and CNPq classiication (n=34)
Fellowship category
Male n (%)
Female n (%)
Total n (%)
1A 1 (4) 0 (0) 1 (3)
1B 1 (4) 0 (0) 1 (3)
1C 5 (19) 0 (0) 5 (14)
1D 5 (19) 1 (13) 6 (18)
2 14 (54) 7 (87) 21 (62)
and four (12.0%) in the area of General Pediatrics. Three (9.0%) researchers appointed the areas of Nephrology, Endocrinology, Gastroenterology, Hematology, and Rheumatology. The areas of Neonatology, Surgery, and Immunology had two researchers (6.0%) each. Other specialties were represented by one researcher each: Neuroscience, Intensive care, and Genetics.
The median time since receiving the doctorate was of 13.5 years (IQ=9–21). Regarding the institution of study, 33 research-ers obtained their PhD in Brazil, and only one in the United States. Five institutions were responsible for approximately 85% of researchers: USP (n=14; 41.0%), UNIFESP (n=7; 21.0%), UFMG (n=5; 15.0%), and Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS) (n=3; 9.0%). Half of the researchers (n=17; 50.0%) obtained their post-doctoral studies abroad, predomi-nantly in institutions in the United States.
During their entire academic career, CNPq researchers in Pediatrics have supervised 290 undergraduate students per researcher (median: 6; IQ=1–13), besides 390 masters’ students (median: 9; IQ=4–18), and 169 doctoral students (median: 4; IQ=1–6). The medians of supervisions in relation to adjusted values for time since receiving the doctorate were: 0.66 under-graduate students/year, 0.70 master’s students/year, and 0.26 PhD students/year. When compared the values adjusted for time of doctoral completion, there was no signiicant difference between researcher categories regarding the supervision of undergraduate students (Mann-Whitney; p=0.07) and master’s students (Mann-Whitney; p=0.57), but there was difference in relation to PhD students. The median of supervisions of PhD students for category
1 researchers was of 0.36/year and, for category 2 researchers, 0.13/year (Mann-Whitney; p=0.046).
In the entire academic career, researchers published 3,122 articles in journals, with a median of 89 articles by researcher (IQ=51–119), ranging from a minimum of 26 to a maximum of 269 articles. In total, 1,258 articles were indexed in the JCR database, approximately 40% of the total number of articles published (median by researcher: 33; IQ=24–45). In Scopus, 1,827 articles were indexed (median: 45; IQ=33–72), equivalent to 58.5% of academic production.
Considering the number of articles adjusted for career time, the median was 5.4 publications/year (IQ=4.1–8.1). The mean adjusted for articles published in the WoS data-base was of 2.4/year (IQ=1.5–3.8) and, in Scopus, 3.4/year (IQ=2.4–4.8). Comparing the values adjusted by doctoral time, there was no signiicant difference between the cat-egories of researchers according to the number of articles published throughout the career (Mann-Whitney; p=0.27) and articles indexed in the JCR (Mann-Whitney; p=0.08). However, there was signiicant difference of articles indexed in the Scopus database (Mann-Whitney; p=0.016).
Most researchers (n=32; 94%) increased the scientiic produc-tion in the last 5 years, considering the average number of articles published per year. This increase ranged from 10 to 304%, with median of 84% (IQ=53–152%) increase in the scientiic produc-tion. The median of articles published in the scientiic career of the 34 researchers was of four per year (IQ=3.1–5.3), while, over the past 5 years, it reached eight (IQ=5.9–10.0). Graph 1 illustrates
Pu
b
lish
e
d
a
rt
icl
e
s
(me
d
ia
n
)
20
15
10
5
0
Researchers
Throughout the entire academic career Last 5 years
20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 1718 19
Graph 1 - Median of articles published/year across their scientiic career and in the last 5 years by 34 CNPq researchers in the
the mean of articles published in the entire scientiic career and the mean over the last 5 years for 34 researchers.
In the entire academic career, researchers in Pediatrics pub-lished in 599 journals. Of this total, the Impact Factor (IF) of 323 journals (54%) was identiied in the JCR (Journal Citation Report) database in base year 2009. The median of the IF was of 2.35 (IQ=1.37–3.73), ranging from 0.024 to 47.05 in the
extremes. In relation to the distribution of the IF, 38 (11.7%) journals had IF<one; 95 (29.4%) journals between one and two; 76 (23.5%) journals between two and three; 42 (13%) between three and four; 23 (7.1%) between four and ive; and 49 (15.1%) had an IF >ive. Graph 2 illustrates the distribution of the IF of journals in which the 3,122 articles from the researchers in Pediatrics were published. It is observed that most articles were
Graph 2 - Distribution of the Impact Factor of the journals in which articles by CNPq researchers in Pediatrics were published.
The graph shows the distribution of the Impact Factor to the limit of 15 (11 journals with greater values were excluded in the presentation of the graph)
N
u
mb
e
r
o
f
Jo
u
rn
a
ls
200
150
100
50
0
Impact Factor
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.54.0 4.5 5.05.5 6.0 6.57.0 7.5 8.0 8.5 9.09.510.010.511.011.512.012.513.0 13.5 14.014.515.0
Table 2 - Distribution of the 15 journals indexed in the JCR database most used for publication by CNPq researchers in the area
of Pediatrics
Indexed Journals Impact Factor Articles %
2009 2010 2011
Jornal de Pediatria 1.380 1.065 1.013 443 14.20
Braz J Med Biol Res 1.070 1.150 1.129 85 2.72
Arq Bras Endoc Metabol 0.680 1.003 0.879 66 2.11
J Ped Gastroenterol Nut 2.186 2.180 2.298 46 1.47
J Clin Endocrinol Metabol 6.202 6.495 5.967 42 1.34
Rev Assoc Med Bras 0.580 0.553 0.771 39 1.25
Cad Saúde Publica 0.829 0.987 0.889 35 1.12
J Pediatrics 4.090 4.042 4.115 32 1.02
J Trop Ped 1.220 1.248 1.388 30 0.96
Leukemia Res 2.350 2.550 2.923 29 0.92
Pediatric Pulmon 1.180 2.239 2.533 29 0.92
Arq Neuro-psiquiatria 0.550 0.574 0.722 29 0.92
Acta Pediatric 1.768 1.955 2.073 27 0.85
Ped Blood Cancer 2.130 1.948 1.891 24 0.77
published in journals with IF between 1 and 2. In relation to the scientiic journals, Table 2 presents the 15 scientiic journals most used by fellows in their publications.
Throughout their academic career, researchers in Pediatrics received a total of 11,290 citations in the WoS database, with a median of 284 quotes by researcher (IQ=120–372, ranging from 25 to 1,678 quotes). The median by article was 7 quotes (IQ=5–10). In Scopus, 14,154 quotes to researchers of Pediatrics were identiied, with a median of 329 quotes by researcher (IQ=176–446, ranging from a minimum of 57 to a maximum of 1,940 quotes). The median of citations per article in the Scopus database was six (IQ=4–9).
The median of h-index in the JCR database was eight (IQ=6– 11), ranging from a minimum of four to a maximum of 25. The corresponding value for the median for the h-index in Scopus was of 9 (IQ=7–11), ranging from a minimum of 5 to a maximum of 24. There was a signiicant difference in the median of the h-indexes, according to the fellowship category of the researcher in WoS database (Mann-Whitney; p=0.03), but there was no difference in the Scopus database (Mann-Whitney; p=0.08).
The median of the m-index, i.e., the h-index corrected by the time of academic career of the researcher, was of 0.56 in the WoS database (IQ=0,39–0,80), ranging from a minimum of 0.22 to a maximum of 1.30. The corresponding value of median for the m-index in the Scopus database was of 0.56 (IQ=0.38–0.77), rang-ing from a minimum of 0.20 to a maximum of 1.41. However, no signiicant difference was found for the m-index among fellowship categories in both databases: JCR (Mann-Whitney; p=0.70) and Scopus(Mann-Whitney; p=0.67).
Discussion
The present study showed that there is still a large concentra-tion of training centers for researchers and few instituconcentra-tions with high productivity that deal with research involving the health of children and adolescents. The results conirm the large concen-tration of scientiic production in a few states, especially in São Paulo, as previously demonstrated(21). Blank et al(21) assessed the
international insertion of Brazilian scientiic production in the ield of Pediatrics. These authors demonstrated that there was a large concentration of scientiic production in São Paulo, which remained stable throughout the study period (1990–2004). This research showed that only three states are responsible for approxi-mately 90% of researchers, and more than half are concentrated in São Paulo (53%).
The present study showed that most researchers (88%) in Pediatrics acts in subareas of knowledge, highlighting the
specialty of Pneumology, with 17.6% (6/34) of researchers. The study identiied only four researchers (12%) working in the area of primary care in Pediatrics and who were not linked to subspecialties. The absence of important areas like Pediatric Cardiology was also noteworthy, despite the fact that Cardiology, as a specialty, represents approximately 8% of CNPq researches in Medicine(14,22).
A point to be emphasized in this analysis is the signii-cant increase in scientiic production in the last 5 years, a fact that was also observed in other areas such as Dentistry, Public Health and Physiotherapy(9-11,13). On average, CNPq
researchers in the area of Pediatrics doubled the number of articles published in the last 5 years.
The analysis of researchers in Pediatrics showed a signii-cant number of articles published in medium IF journals. During the academic career, the median was of 89 articles by researcher, similar to the mean of 87 articles from the 411 research fellows in the area of Medicine, observed in a pre-vious study(14). It should be noted that approximately 40%
of all published articles were indexed in the JCR database and 58.5%, in the Scopus database, which are important parameters of quality in scientiic production. However, it is interesting to note that these qualitative data are lower compared to the general analysis of the 411 researchers in the ield of Medicine. In this previous analysis, it was observed that approximately 51 and 68% of all published articles were indexed in the WoS and Scopus databases, respectively(14).
These data are also lower than data of researchers in the subareas of Cardiology and Nephrology, for instance, which had 55 and 58% of articles indexed in the JCR database, respectively(22,23). This scenario may certainly change in the
coming years with the recent indexing of Jornal de Pediatria (Brazilian Journal of Pediatrics) in the JCR database and with the obtaining of an IF greater than 1,00 in the irst assess-ment in 2009(24). In this context, another positive point was
the indexing, in 2011, of Revista Paulista de Pediatria (Journal of Pediatrics of the state of São Paulo) in Scopus database.
Despite substantial criticism of the use of the IF of journals in the evaluation of institutions and researchers, this index continues to be adopted by many agencies that support research(17,19,25-30).
In this context, stands out the importance of valuing Brazilian journals, an essential factor for national scientiic development, as emphasized in a recent editorial signed by important editors of national publications(31,32). It is of particular interest that, although
this study was not designed to answer this question, such ind-ings regarding the IF of journals in which the most productive researchers in Pediatrics publish, reinforce the criticisms about the new Capes’Qualis(33). As mentioned, our study showed a
median IF of 2.35 and a 75th percentile of 3.73. According to documents of Capes regarding the area Medicine II, which include Post-Graduation programs in Pediatrics, journals are classiied as A1, when the IF≥4, and as A2, when the IF is situated between
2.8 and 3.999(34). Thus, a classiication that underestimates an
important share of the production of the main researchers in the area of Pediatrics does not seem reasonable.
It may be concluded that researchers in the ield of Pediatrics present a relevant scientiic output from the quantitative point of view, but that still needs further qualitative improvement.
Acknowledgements
This study was partially funded by a grant from the Foundation for Research Support of the State of Minas Gerais (Fapemig). Eduardo Araujo Oliveira and Ana Cristina S. e Silva are CNPq researchers category 2 in the ield of Medicine. Hercílio Martelli-Júnior and Enrico Antonio Colosimo are CNPq researchers category 2 in the areas of Odontology and Statistics, respectively.
References
1. Goldani MZ, Gurgel RQ, Blank D, Gerolin J, Mari JJ. Pursuing eficiency: international visibility of the scientiic production of Brazilian graduate programs in child and adolescent health from 1998 through 2003. J Pediatr (Rio J) 2007;83:436-40.
2. King DA. The scientiic impact of nations. Nature 2004;430:311-6.
3. Pinheiro-Machado R, de Oliveira PL. The Brazilian investment in science and technology. Braz J Med Biol Res 2001;34:1521-30.
4. Zorzetto R, Razzouk D, Dubugras MT, Gerolin J, Schor N, Guimarães JA et al. The scientiic production in health and biological sciences of the top 20 Brazilian universities. Braz J Med Biol Res 2006;39:1513-20.
5. Petherick A. High hopes for Brazilian science. Nature 2010;465:674-5. 6. Regalado A. Science in Brazil. Talented but underfunded: Brazil’s future
scientists. Science 2010;330:1311.
7. Deheinzelin D, Caramelli B. Scientiic production, post-graduate education and Revista da Associação Médica Brasileira. Rev Assoc Med Bras 2007;53:471-2. 8. Guimarães R. Challenges of postgraduate human health programs in Brazil.
Rev Saude Publica 2011;45:1-13.
9. Santos NC, Candido LF, Kuppens CL. Research productivity of CNPq: analysis of the chemistry researchs’ proile. Quim Nova 2010;33:489-95.
10. Barata RB, Goldbaum M. A proile of researchers in public health with productivity grants from the Brazilian National Research Council (CNPq). Cad Saude Publica 2003;19:1863-76.
11. Cavalcante RA, Barbosa DR, Bonan PR, Pires MB, Martelli-Júnior H. Proile of dentistry researchers of the Brazilian National Research Council (CNPq). Rev Bras Epidemiol 2008;11:106-13.
12. Mendes PH, Martelli DR, Souza WP, Quirino Filho S, Martelli Júnior H. Proile of medical researchers with scietinic productivity grants from the Brazilian National Research Council (CNPq). Rev Bras Educ Med 2010;34:535-41. 13. Santos SM, Lima LS, Martelli DR, Martelli-Júnior H. Abstract of public health
researchers in the National for Scientiic and Technological Developmental. Physis 2009;19:761-75.
14. Martelli-Junior H, Martelli DR, Quirino IG, Oliveira MC, Lima LS, Oliveira EA. CNPq researchers in medicine: a comparative study of research areas. Rev Assoc Med Bras 2010;56:478-83.
15. Oliveira EA, Colosimo EA, Martelli DR, Quirino IG, Oliveira MC, Lima LS et al.
Comparison of Brazilian researchers in clinical medicine: are criteria for ranking well-adjusted? Scientometrics 2011;90:429-43.
16. Bornmann L, Mutz R, Daniel HD. Are there better indices for evaluation
purposes than the h index? A comparison of nine different variants of the h index using data from biomedicine. JASIST 2008;59:830-7.
17. Haeffner-Cavaillon N, Graillot-Gak C. The use of bibliometric indicators to help peer-review assessment. Arch Immunol Ther Exp (Warsz) 2009;57:33-8. 18. Hirsch JE. An index to quantify an individual’s scientiic research output. Proc
Natl Acad Sci U S A 2005;102:16569-72.
19. Lehmann S, Jackson AD, Lautrup BE. Measures for measures. Nature 2006;444:1003-4.
20. Panaretos J, Malesios CC. Assessing scientiic research performance and impact with single indices. Scientometrics 2009;81:635-70.
21. Blank D, Rosa LO, Gurgel RQ, Goldani MZ. Brazilian knowledge production in the ield of child and adolescent health. J Pediatr (Rio J) 2006;82:97-102. 22. Oliveira EA, Ribeiro AL, Quirino IG, Oliveira MC, Martelli DR, Lima LS et al.
Proile and scientiic production of CNPq researchers in cardiology. Arq Bras Cardiol 2011;97:186-93.
23. Oliveira EA, Pécoits-Filho R, Quirino IG, Oliveira MC, Martelli DR, Lima LS et al. Proile and scientiic production of CNPq researchers in nephorology and urology. J Bras Nefrol 2011;33:31-7.
24. Procianoy RS. 2009 impact factor: a new reality for Jornal de Pediatria. J Pediatr (Rio J) 2010;84:255-6.
25. Bordons M, Fernández MT, Gómes I. Advantages and limitations in the use
of impact factor measures for the assessment of research performance in a
peripheral country. Scientometrics 2002;53:195-206.
26. Brink AJ. Impact factor: use and abuse. Cardiovasc J S Afr 2004;15:5-7. 27. Moed HF. New developments in the use of citation analysis in research
evaluation. Arch Immunol Ther Exp (Warsz) 2009;57:13-8. 28. Simons K. The misused impact factor. Science 2008;322:165.
29. Szklo M. Impact factor: good reasons for concern. Epidemiology 2008;19:369. 30. Wilcox AJ. Rise and fall of the Thomson impact factor. Epidemiology
2008;19:373-4.
31. Andriolo A, Souza AF, Farias AQ, Barbosa AJ, França Netto AS, Hernandez AJ et al. Classiication of Journals in the QUALIS System of CAPES: urgent need of changing the criteria! Arq Bras Cardiol 2010;94:271-2.
32. Andriolo A, Souza AF, Farias AQ, Barbosa AJ, Netto AS, Hernandez AJ et al.
Classiication of Journals in the Qualis System of Capes: urgent need of changing the criteria! J Bras Nefrol 2010;32:4-6.
33. Rocha-e-Silva M. O novo Qualis, que não tem nada a ver com a ciência do Brasil. Carta aberta ao presidente da Capes. Clinics 2009;64:721-4. 34. Brasil - Ministério da Educação - CAPES [homepage on the Internet]. Brasília:
